Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

SEAM: An Integrated Activation-Coupled Model of Sentence Processing and Eye Movements in Reading

Published 9 Mar 2023 in q-bio.NC and cs.CL | (2303.05221v4)

Abstract: Models of eye-movement control during reading, developed largely within psychology, usually focus on visual, attentional, lexical, and motor processes but neglect post-lexical language processing; by contrast, models of sentence comprehension processes, developed largely within psycholinguistics, generally focus only on post-lexical language processes. We present a model that combines these two research threads, by integrating eye-movement control and sentence processing. Developing such an integrated model is extremely challenging and computationally demanding, but such an integration is an important step toward complete mathematical models of natural language comprehension in reading. We combine the SWIFT model of eye-movement control (Seelig et al., 2020, doi:10.1016/j.jmp.2019.102313) with key components of the Lewis and Vasishth sentence processing model (Lewis & Vasishth, 2005, doi:10.1207/s15516709cog0000_25). This integration becomes possible, for the first time, due in part to recent advances in successful parameter identification in dynamical models, which allows us to investigate profile log-likelihoods for individual model parameters. We present a fully implemented proof-of-concept model demonstrating how such an integrated model can be achieved; our approach includes Bayesian model inference with Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) sampling as a key computational tool. The integrated Sentence-Processing and Eye-Movement Activation-Coupled Model (SEAM) can successfully reproduce eye movement patterns that arise due to similarity-based interference in reading. To our knowledge, this is the first-ever integration of a complete process model of eye-movement control with linguistic dependency completion processes in sentence comprehension. In future work, this proof of concept model will need to be evaluated using a comprehensive set of benchmark data.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (91)
  1. “The atomic components of thought” Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1998
  2. John R. Anderson “Human Symbol Manipulation Within an Integrated Cognitive Architecture” In Cognitive Science 29.3, 2005, pp. 313–341 DOI: 10.1207/s15516709cog0000_22
  3. “An Integrated Theory of the Mind” In Psychological Review 111.4, 2004, pp. 1036–1060 DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.111.4.1036
  4. John Robert Anderson “Cognitive psychology and its implications” New York: Freeman, 1990
  5. “An analysis of the saccadic system by means of double step stimuli” In Vision Research 19.9 Elsevier, 1979, pp. 967–983 DOI: 10.1016/0042-6989(79)90222-0
  6. Randall D. Beer “Dynamical approaches to cognitive science” In Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4.3 Elsevier BV, 2000, pp. 91–99 DOI: 10.1016/s1364-6613(99)01440-0
  7. “Parsing costs as predictors of reading difficulty: An evaluation using the Potsdam Sentence Corpus” In Journal of Eye Movement Research 2.1, 2008, pp. 1–12 DOI: 10.16910/jemr.2.1.1
  8. Paul-Christian Bürkner “brms: An R Package for Bayesian Multilevel Models Using Stan” In Journal of Statistical Software 80.1 Foundation for Open Access Statistic, 2017 DOI: 10.18637/jss.v080.i01
  9. Paul-Christian Bürkner “Advanced Bayesian Multilevel Modeling with the R Package brms” In The R Journal 10.1 The R Foundation, 2018, pp. 395 DOI: 10.32614/rj-2018-017
  10. Paul-Christian Bürkner “Bayesian Item Response Modeling in R with brms and Stan” In Journal of Statistical Software 100.5 Foundation for Open Access Statistic, 2021 DOI: 10.18637/jss.v100.i05
  11. “Stan: A Probabilistic Programming Language” In Journal of Statistical Software 76.1 Foundation for Open Access Statistic, 2017 DOI: 10.18637/jss.v076.i01
  12. “Why reread? Evidence from garden-path and local coherence structures” In Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 70.7 SAGE Publications Sage UK: London, England, 2017, pp. 1380–1405
  13. C. Clifton, A. Staub and K. Rayner “Eye Movements in Reading Words and Sentences” In Eye movements: A window on mind and brain Elsevier, 2007
  14. L.Z. Daily, M.C. Lovett and L.M. Reder “Modeling individual differences in working memory performance: A source activation account” In Cognitive Science 25.3 Wiley Online Library, 2001, pp. 315–353 DOI: 10.1207/s15516709cog2503_1
  15. Jakub Dotlačil “Building an ACT-R reader for eye-tracking corpus data” In Topics in Cognitive Science 10.1 Wiley Online Library, 2018, pp. 144–160 DOI: 10.1111/tops.12315
  16. Jakub Dotlačil “Parsing as a Cue-Based Retrieval Model” In Cognitive Science 45.8 Wiley Online Library, 2021, pp. e13020 DOI: 10.1111/cogs.13020
  17. Ralf Engbert “Dynamical Models in Neurocognitive Psychology” Springer Nature Publishing, 2021 DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-67299-7
  18. “Readers use Bayesian estimation for eye movement control” In Psychological Science 21.3 Sage Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA, 2010, pp. 366–371 DOI: 10.1177/0956797610362060
  19. Ralf Engbert, André Longtin and Reinhold Kliegl “A dynamical model of saccade generation in reading based on spatially distributed lexical processing” In Vision Research 42.5 Elsevier, 2002, pp. 621–636 DOI: 10.1016/S0042-6989(01)00301-7
  20. “SWIFT: A Dynamical Model of Saccade Generation During Reading.” In Psychological Review 112.4 American Psychological Association (APA), 2005, pp. 777–813 DOI: 10.1037/0033-295x.112.4.777
  21. “Data assimilation in dynamical cognitive science” In Trends in Cognitive Sciences 26.2 Elsevier BV, 2022, pp. 99–102 DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2021.11.006
  22. Felix Engelmann “ACTR-in-R” GitHub repository, 2015 URL: https://github.com/felixengelmann/ACTR-in-R/tree/ee01519
  23. “A Framework for Modeling the Interaction of Syntactic Processing and Eye Movement Control” In Topics in Cognitive Science 5.3 Wiley, 2013, pp. 452–474 DOI: 10.1111/tops.12026
  24. Felix Engelmann, Lena A Jäger and Shravan Vasishth “The effect of prominence and cue association on retrieval processes: A computational account” In Cognitive Science 43.12 Wiley Online Library, 2019, pp. Article e12800 DOI: 10.1111/cogs.12800
  25. Felix Engelmann, Lena A. Jäger and Shravan Vasishth “The effect of prominence and cue association in retrieval processes: A computational account” In Cognitive Science 43, 2020, pp. e12800 DOI: 10.1111/cogs.12800
  26. John M Findlay and Robin Walker “A model of saccade generation based on parallel processing and competitive inhibition” In Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22.4, 1999, pp. 661–674 DOI: 10.1017/s0140525x99002150
  27. Lyn Frazier “On Comprehending Sentences: Syntactic Parsing Strategies”, 1979
  28. “Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences” In Cognitive Psychology 14.2 Academic Press, 1982, pp. 178–210 DOI: 10.1016/0010-0285(82)90008-1
  29. Laurence S. Freedman, D. Lowe and P. Macaskill “Stopping Rules for Clinical Trials Incorporating Clinical Opinion” In Biometrics 40.3, 1984, pp. 575–586 DOI: 10.2307/2530902
  30. C W Gardiner “Handbook of stochastic processes” Springer-Verlag, New York, 1985
  31. Andrew Gelman, Jessica Hwang and Aki Vehtari “Understanding predictive information criteria for Bayesian models” In Statistics and Computing 24.6 Springer, 2014, pp. 997–1016 DOI: 10.1007/s11222-013-9416-2
  32. Edward Gibson “Linguistic Complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies” In Cognition 68, 1998, pp. 1–76 DOI: 10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00034-1
  33. Edward Gibson “Dependency Locality Theory: A Distance-Based Theory of Linguistic Complexity” In Image, Language, Brain: Papers from the First Mind Articulation Project Symposium Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2000
  34. “Similarity-based interference during language comprehension: Evidence from eye tracking during reading.” In Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 32.6 American Psychological Association, 2006, pp. 1304–1321 DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.32.6.1304
  35. “Surprisal does not explain syntactic disambiguation difficulty: evidence from a large-scale benchmark” PsyArXiv, 2023 DOI: 10.31234/osf.io/z38u6
  36. Albrecht W Inhoff and Ulrich W Weger “Memory for word location during reading: Eye movements to previously read words are spatially selective but not precise” In Memory & Cognition 33.3 Springer, 2005, pp. 447–461
  37. “Teasing apart retrieval and encoding interference in the processing of anaphors” In Frontiers in Psychology 6 Frontiers Media SA, 2015, pp. 506 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00506
  38. Lena A. Jäger, Felix Engelmann and Shravan Vasishth “Similarity-based interference in sentence comprehension: Literature review and Bayesian meta-analysis” In Journal of Memory and Language 94, 2017, pp. 316–339 DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2017.01.004
  39. “Interference patterns in subject-verb agreement and reflexives revisited: A large-sample study” In Journal of Memory and Language 111, 2020 DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2019.104063
  40. Marcel A Just and Patricia A Carpenter “A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension” In Psychological Review 87.4 American Psychological Association, 1980, pp. 329–354 DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.87.4.329
  41. “Length, frequency, and predictability effects of words on eye movements in reading” In European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 16.1-2 Taylor & Francis, 2004, pp. 262–284 DOI: 10.1080/09541440340000213
  42. John Kruschke “Doing Bayesian data analysis: A tutorial with R, JAGS, and Stan” Academic Press, 2014
  43. Sol Lago, Carlos Acuña Fariña and Enrique Meseguer “The reading signatures of agreement attraction” In Open Mind 5 MIT Press One Rogers Street, Cambridge, MA 02142-1209, USA journals-info …, 2021, pp. 132–153 DOI: 10.1162/opmi_a_00047
  44. Eric Laloy and Jasper A. Vrugt “High-dimensional posterior exploration of hydrologic models using multiple-try DREAM(ZS)subscriptDREAMZS\mathrm{DREAM}_{\mathrm{(ZS)}}roman_DREAM start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_ZS ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and high-performance computing” In Water Resources Research 48.1, 2012 DOI: 10.1029/2011wr010608
  45. Yoonhyoung Lee, Hanjung Lee and Peter C Gordon “Linguistic complexity and information structure in Korean: Evidence from eye-tracking during reading” In Cognition 104.3 Elsevier, 2007, pp. 495–534 DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.07.013
  46. Roger P Levy “Expectation-based syntactic comprehension” In Cognition 106, 2008, pp. 1126–1177 DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.05.006
  47. Daniel Lewandowski, Dorota Kurowicka and Harry Joe “Generating random correlation matrices based on vines and extended onion method” In Journal of Multivariate Analysis 100.9 Elsevier, 2009, pp. 1989–2001 DOI: 10.1016/j.jmva.2009.04.008
  48. Richard L. Lewis and Shravan Vasishth “An Activation-Based Model of Sentence Processing as Skilled Memory Retrieval” In Cognitive Science 29.3 Wiley, 2005, pp. 375–419 DOI: 10.1207/s15516709cog0000_25
  49. Richard L Lewis, Shravan Vasishth and Julie A Van Dyke “Computational principles of working memory in sentence comprehension” In Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10.10 Elsevier, 2006, pp. 447–454 DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2006.08.007
  50. “A computational investigation of sources of variability in sentence comprehension difficulty in aphasia” In Topics in Cognitive Science 10.1 Wiley Online Library, 2018, pp. 161–174 DOI: 10.1111/tops.12323
  51. “Eye movement control during reading: I. The location of initial eye fixations on words” In Vision Research 28.10, 1988, pp. 1107–1118 DOI: 10.1016/0042-6989(88)90137-X
  52. “Syntactic and semantic interference in sentence comprehension: Support from English and German eye-tracking data” In Glossa Psycholinguistics 2.1, 2023 DOI: 10.5070/G60111266
  53. Enrique Meseguer, Manuel Carreiras and Charles Clifton “Overt reanalysis strategies and eye movements during the reading of mild garden path sentences” In Memory & Cognition 30.4 Springer, 2002, pp. 551–561
  54. “Accounting for regressive eye-movements in models of sentence processing: A reappraisal of the Selective Reanalysis hypothesis” In Journal of Memory and Language 59.3 Elsevier, 2008, pp. 266–293 DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2008.06.002
  55. “Data assimilation: mathematics for merging models and data” In Snapshots of modern mathematics from Oberwolfach 11, 2018 DOI: 10.14760/SNAP-2018-011-EN
  56. Bruno Nicenboim, Shravan Vasishth and Frank Rösler “Are words pre-activated probabilistically during sentence comprehension? Evidence from new data and a Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis using publicly available data” In Neuropsychologia 142, 2020 DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2020.107427
  57. Bruno Nicenboim, Daniel J. Schad and Shravan Vasishth “Introduction to Bayesian Data Analysis for Cognitive Science” Under contract with Chapman and Hall/CRC Statistics in the Social and Behavioral Sciences Series, 2023 URL: https://vasishth.github.io/bayescogsci/
  58. “Is reanalysis selective when regressions are consciously controlled?” In Glossa Psycholinguistics 1.1, 2022
  59. “A Bayesian approach to dynamical modeling of eye-movement control in reading of normal, mirrored, and scrambled texts” In Psychological Review 128.5, 2021, pp. 803–823 DOI: 10.1037/rev0000268
  60. Keith Rayner “Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research” In Psychological Bulletin 124.3, 1998, pp. 372–422 DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372
  61. “Probabilistic forecasting and Bayesian data assimilation” Cambridge University Press, 2015 DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781107706804
  62. Erik D. Reichle “Computational Models of Reading” Oxford University Press, 2021
  63. “Toward a model of eye movement control in reading” In Psychological Review 105.1 American Psychological Association, 1998, pp. 125–157 DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.105.1.125
  64. Erik D Reichle, Keith Rayner and Alexander Pollatsek “The E-Z Reader model of eye-movement control in reading: Comparisons to other models” In Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26.4 Cambridge University Press, 2003, pp. 445–476 DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X03000104
  65. Erik D Reichle, Tessa Warren and Kerry McConnell “Using E-Z Reader to model the effects of higher level language processing on eye movements during reading” In Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 16.1 Springer, 2009, pp. 1–21 DOI: 10.3758/PBR.16.1.1
  66. “Some empirical tests of an interactive activation model of eye movement control in reading” In Cognitive Systems Research 7, 2006, pp. 34–55 DOI: 10.1016/j.cogsys.2005.07.006
  67. “How persuasive is a good fit? A comment on theory testing.” In Psychological Review 107.2 American Psychological Association, 2000, pp. 358–367 DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.107.2.358
  68. Dario D Salvucci “An integrated model of eye movements and visual encoding” In Cognitive Systems Research 1.4 Elsevier, 2001, pp. 201–220 DOI: 10.1016/S1389-0417(00)00015-2
  69. Daniel J. Schad, Michael Betancourt and Shravan Vasishth “Toward a principled Bayesian workflow in cognitive science” In Psychological Methods, 2020 DOI: 10.1037/met0000275
  70. H.E.H. Schilling, K. Rayner and J.I. Chumbley “Comparing naming, lexical decision, and eye fixation times: Word frequency effects and individual differences” In Memory and Cognition 26.6 Psychonomic Society, 1998, pp. 1270–1281 DOI: 10.3758/BF03201199
  71. Elizabeth R Schotter, Randy Tran and Keith Rayner “Don’t believe what you read (only once) comprehension is supported by regressions during reading” In Psychological Science 25.6 Sage Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA, 2014, pp. 1218–1226
  72. “Likelihood-based parameter estimation and comparison of dynamical cognitive models.” In Psychological Review 124.4 American Psychological Association, 2017, pp. 505–524 DOI: 10.1037/rev0000068
  73. “Modeling the effects of perisaccadic attention on gaze statistics during scene viewing” In Communications Biology 3, 2020, pp. Article 727 DOI: 10.1038/s42003-020-01429-8
  74. Lisa Schwetlick, Daniel Backhaus and Ralf Engbert “A dynamical scan-path model for task-dependence during scene viewing” In Psychological Review American Psychological Association (APA), 2022 DOI: 10.1037/rev0000379
  75. “Bayesian parameter estimation for the SWIFT model of eye-movement control during reading” In Journal of Mathematical Psychology 95 Elsevier BV, 2020, pp. 102313 DOI: 10.1016/j.jmp.2019.102313
  76. “Readers are parallel processors” In Trends in Cognitive Sciences 23.7 Elsevier, 2019, pp. 537–546 DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2019.04.006
  77. “OB1-Reader: A model of word recognition and eye movements in text reading” In Psychological Review 125.6 American Psychological Association, 2018, pp. 969–984 DOI: 10.1037/rev0000119
  78. Tanner Sorensen, Sven Hohenstein and Shravan Vasishth “Bayesian linear mixed models using Stan: A tutorial for psychologists, linguists, and cognitive scientists” In Quantitative Methods for Psychology 12.3, 2016, pp. 175–200 DOI: 10.20982/tqmp.12.3.p175
  79. David J Spiegelhalter, Laurence S. Freedman and Mahesh KB Parmar “Bayesian approaches to randomized trials” In Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (Statistics in Society) 157.3, 1994, pp. 357–416 DOI: 10.2307/2983527
  80. “Underspecification of syntactic ambiguities: Evidence from self-paced reading” In Memory and Cognition 36.1 Springer, 2008, pp. 201–216 DOI: 10.3758/MC.36.1.201
  81. Cajo J.F. Braak and J.A. Vrugt “Differential Evolution Markov Chain with snooker updater and fewer chains” In Statistics and Computing 18.4, 2008, pp. 435–446 DOI: 10.1007/s11222-008-9104-9
  82. Julie A. Van Dyke “Interference effects from grammatically unavailable constituents during sentence processing.” In Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 33.2 American Psychological Association (APA), 2007, pp. 407–430 DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.33.2.407
  83. Nicolaas Godfried Van Kampen “Stochastic processes in physics and chemistry” Elsevier, 1992
  84. “Sentence comprehension as a cognitive process: A computational approach”, 2022 URL: https://vasishth.github.io/RetrievalModels/
  85. “Towards a complete model of reading: Simulating lexical decision, word naming, and sentence reading with Über-Reader” In Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 2020 Cognitive Science Society URL: https://hdl.handle.net/2123/22990
  86. “What is the scanpath signature of syntactic reanalysis?” In Journal of Memory and Language 65, 2011, pp. 109–127 DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2011.02.004
  87. “Scanpaths reveal syntactic underspecification and reanalysis strategies” In Language and Cognitive Processes 28.10 Taylor & Francis, 2013, pp. 1545–1578 DOI: 10.1080/01690965.2012.728232
  88. “Accelerating Markov Chain Monte Carlo Simulation by Differential Evolution with Self-Adaptive Randomized Subspace Sampling” In International Journal of Nonlinear Sciences and Numerical Simulation 10.3, 2009 DOI: 10.1515/ijnsns.2009.10.3.273
  89. Tessa Warren, Sarah J. White and Erik D. Reichle “Investigating the causes of wrap-up effects: Evidence from eye movements and E–Z Reader” In Cognition 111.1 Elsevier BV, 2009, pp. 132–137 DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.12.011
  90. Ulrich W Weger and Albrecht W Inhoff “Long-range regressions to previously read words are guided by spatial and verbal memory” In Memory & Cognition 35 Springer, 2007, pp. 1293–1306
  91. “Number feature distortion modulates cue-based retrieval in reading” In Journal of Memory and Language 129, 2023, pp. 104400 DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2022.104400
Citations (3)

Summary

Paper to Video (Beta)

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.